3 year old injured by crocodiles - man arrested

[DecisionTime123]

So I assume the man deliberately placed the child into the crocodile enclosure. Psychopath? Sounds similar to the man who threw the boy off the Tate?

(And also, not connected but these places are shit for the animals and should be shut down)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/czx50n2vj74o

(& apologies if thread already started?)

We don’t give young children the same rights as adults due to lack of capacity, eg, driving a car, so why should some have a get out of jail card on the one hand and full adult rights on the other? Rights and responsibilities should be balanced and if an individual cannot accept adult responsibilities they should not be accorded full adult rights. Look at the collateral damage of his right to a day at the zoo.

He likely doesn't have 'full adult rights' in the sense that he potentially isn't capable of driving a car or toileting or dressing himself just like a young toddler.

How is going to the zoo a ‘full adult right’? What are the entire list of ‘full adult rights’ so I can be clear I’m getting all mine.

Moving freely in society in public places is a full adult right. Being violent whilst doing so would be reprehensible and penalized , but not if you have a get out of jail card.

He won't have full adult rights. Independent adults have control over their finances, they decide where they live, they decide when they get up, they decide what they wear, they decide when they go to bed, they decide how they spend their time, and with whom. As an independent adult, if I want to go to the 24 hour supermarket at 2am because I'm out of chocolate, I can.

In residential care, you get little to none of this. You are woken up by whoever is on shift that morning at the time they think is appropriate. Depending on how good the setting is, you might get to ask for a lie in, because there is a huge gap between what is best practice (letting people have some autonomy over when to get up) and what happens on the ground when CQC inspectors aren't looking. You pick your clothes from what's offered (if the staff can be bothered to follow the care plan that says you get a choice of at least two outfits), you eat breakfast from what the setting provides. Then you sit in an armchair with nothing to do while the carer on shift doomscrolls on their phone. Then it's lunch time. Maybe you get away from your own four walls for a trip outside before dinner.

The trip to the zoo would have been pre-arranged on his behalf as a beneficial activity by the care setting. He may not even have had any input into the decision beyond a staff member saying "would you like to go to the zoo next month"? If you live somewhere like that, you can't say "I want to go to the zoo" and go that day. It will have been arranged around the staffing rota, staff annual leave and the health appointments of anyone else resident at the same setting.

He has a disability that means his brain and cognitive thought processes are not operating at the same age as his body.
He probably has a deprivation of liberty order on him. That basically means he can't just be out and about on his own. But with carers, he absolutely should be allowed out, and allowed to live a life as normal as possible.

BTW, you could be like him one day. Dementia will do that to you too.
My gran changed homes several times because she was violent. In her 80s, she pinned another resident to the floor and gave them black eyes. No police called... what would be the point. Drag her to the police station and put her in the dock on trial?

But with carers, he absolutely should be allowed out, and allowed to live a life as normal as possible.

Not if he harms other people.

Well that will be the case now.
But if he had not harmed anyone up until now, then should he have been locked up before?

Well, obviously not. The setting management and staff on duty have a duty of care to the service user and to people who could be harmed by staff action or inaction. Like other people at the zoo.

No-one was taking him out thinking, "oh he has a right to drop children in with dangerous animals". The two most likely scenarios are that his care plan does not accurately predict his risk to others, or that the staff on duty did not follow it.

Something has gone very wrong somewhere and a child is paying for it. There will be a police investigation and emergency CQC inspection of the care provider. I don't know what they will find, but I guarantee they won't find a piece of paper saying "this adult has the right to seriously injure children", because no-one will have believed that.

@pollyhemlockcruel and ridiculous? Imagine if that was your 3 year old. Would you be as sympathetic then? I doubt it. Simpering post.

In her 80s, she pinned another resident to the floor and gave them black eyes. No police called... what would be the point. Drag her to the police station and put her in the dock on trial?

The point would be to be review the safety of other residents and the provisions of the care home in protecting other residents.

I can see a lot of reasons why the police still should have been called. The reason they weren't is because the care home didn't want scrutiny. That's not ok.

No, he should not absolutely be allowed out with carers unless those carers are sufficiently skilled and of the size and strength to monitor and restrain him at any given moment. The problem is the caring profession is underpaid, mostly female and although the majority of staff do their best they are not equipped to deal with male patients with severe MH or learning difficulties who might be twice their size. It’s not a profession that attracts the kind of well-built men you would need to adequately neutralise a mentally ill man who suddenly becomes violent and tries to attack a child.

You cannot compare a man like that with your 80 year old gran.

Thats true. Children and people with diminished responsibility are subject to different rules and regulations.

I think I just took issue with the quoted sentance implying that no one was to blame, but someone has been badly injured by a deliberate act, so someone needs to take responsibility for that.

Your daughter can be out and about but people should still be safe around people with disabilities and this little boy wasn’t kept safe from this man.
I don’t know if you’ll be expecting the boy’s family to be understanding and forgiving because the man has a learning disability, but I think it would be a massive ask. Even people who don’t know anyone involved are finding it difficult to just accept that it’s “just one of those things” when someone who has a learning disability is out in public. And something on this scale of seriousness definitely should not be happening.

Of course I wouldn’t expect the little boy’s family to be understanding and forgiving. How could they possibly be? However the police and social services clearly have to take a balanced view which includes dealing appropriately with someone who may have no concept of the harm they have caused. Some of the commentary on social media about this case is appalling.

Loathe to rile the dragons again, but I just dont thjnk you understand our point of view.
Im not saying that crime doesnt need rehabilitation for offenders and justice for victims. We dont know what happened yet and none of us are the judge here/can comment.

At the same time posters are saying this man shouldn't have been out/around kids/around the public/at a zoo. And some extreme posts have called for institutions to be reopened or peoples human rights to be breached.

That is what riles us up. Or at least me.
The speculation is expected but not welcome.

As im sure you'll bring it up, my opinion that there can be too tragedies, both for victim and perpetrator stands. Life isn't black and white. People aren't good or bad. Anyone's life thar ends up in prison is to some degree a tragedy and generally there are multiple failures along the life course, not just the perpetrator's own.

Yes . One ( fairly ) prominent conservative commentator on X has opined that this incident would never have happened before Care in the Community and then talks with nostalgia about abandoned Victorian asylums. This commentator is a prominent Catholic who opposes abortion in all circumstances. So it’s absolutely fine for very severely disabled children to be born and they can then be shoved into an institution when they’re older and less cute. I hasten to say we would never want to be without our DD even though she’s sometimes very hard work. But you get my point.

In our local press (Eastern Daily Press if anyone wants to read online), that Norfolk County Council have launched an investigation into the company providing the care of the man who did this awful act. They have suspended using the company. Witnesses have alleged that the carers, two of them, were metres away from the man and on their phones. Also, the carers tried to get him into a car after the incident but were stopped by staff.

Addenbrokes Hospital also under investigation, because over forty members of staff accessed the poor little lad’s medical records. Bless him, he’s had five operations and needs at least two more. His parents must be going through hell.

I've read that in national news too, definitely the right thing to do. I've also read that they are investigating if the man was neglected/abused too.

Hopefully it's just a case of the hospital covering their tracks considering it's a high profile case as I know they referred themselves for investigation. Considering how critical he was, I can imagine 40+ members of staff genuinely needing to access his files but if anyone has found to have accessed them just to be nosey then hopefully they will be dealt with.

Poor little boy. Hopefully he won't remember much of this as he gets older and the surgeons can fully fix his arm. It's going to be a long road to recovery.

That's interesting as the bbc have reported that whilst NCC are investigating they didn't provide, commission or pay for any care for this man. Which brings its own questions tbh!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr7xxj7rey5o

The carers need serious investigation and charging. @Middlemarch123 I saw that too it was reported that the carers were at a distance and on their phones not keeping an eye on the culprit.
They also tried to do a runner but staff stopped them.
That is shocking to flee the scene after such a horrific incident.
They should be charged with neglect , we’ve not heard them named as yet.
That poor boy it’s truly horrific.

The BBC's reporting is very much 'boy injured by crocodiles' rather than 'man threw boy into crocodiles', wonder what the thinking is behind that.

sounds a typical “nothing to see here…. Believe this narrative”…

Maybe because there’s an ongoing investigation, they’re having to be careful what they say.

I’ve long given up trusting the BBC their reporting is so skewed.

Their reporting of this was awful ..he didn’t just end up in a crocodile pit he was thrown in.

Give the blooming facts!